Earlier quoted context omitted.
As someone who has traveled on OBB and non-acela Amtrak, how would you describe Acela journey? Is it a significantly better experience?
I mean its very hard to compare an overnight train experience with a few blues Boston to NYC. The Acella is fine you have a large seat with some space around you and pretty crappy wifi. Definitely more comfortable than a coach airline seat maybe in line with business class space and comfort wise but otherwise not that not worthy.
Austria rail operator OeBB unveils new night trains
261–267 of 267 posts
Re: Austria rail operator OeBB unveils new night trains
#262Re: Austria rail operator OeBB unveils new night trains
#263Earlier quoted context omitted.
Why not? If it’s truly about the environment then everyone should pay based on their environmental impact. Sure, if carbon/methane/whatever can be shown to have a higher environmental impact when emitted at altitude or whatever, take that into account. But placing the environment second to specifically target the “luxury” as some sort of way to “get” the rich is only harming your case.
No. It's about maximizing value per emission. The value of luxury goods is less than basic necessities (it's stuff we can live without by definition) so the rate should compensate for that. I would accept a flat rate if each person got a fixed amount of emissions assigned to them and each person could decide to sell or keep their "emission right". Then everyone would have enough for basic needs. In practice the resul…
Trying to inject value judgements into it turns the whole situation into an absurd government mandated ethics board. The precise task governments have shown themselves to royally screw up time and time again.
Re: Austria rail operator OeBB unveils new night trains
#264Earlier quoted context omitted.
If aviation fuel was taxed at 100%, the ticket prices would only go up 20%. This alone would not make trains significantly more competitive. Generally speaking, though, it doesn’t make sense to compare subsidies and taxes individually. Both planes and trains are already heavily subsidized, and if you removed all subsidies and taxes, I suspect planes would win handily.
> if you removed all subsidies and taxes, I suspect planes would win handily Until all transport is long-term sustainable in terms of environmental impact the cost calculus is messed up. Check out carbon footprint ranking of different modes [1]. [1] https://ourworldindata.org/travel-carbon-footprint
Re: Austria rail operator OeBB unveils new night trains
#265I have taken the car train from Hamburg to Vienna as a family. Pure luxury and comfort! We drive from Denmark to Hamburg(with a 2 year old), and load the fully packed car(stroller, luggages gifts for the in-laws etc) into the train at a special entrance, and walk into the coaches. We booked a private cabin/room for more privacy and also because we have a two year old. There were quite comfortable bunk booths as well…
This, like many other ideas combining cars and public transport, sounds like something that doesn't scale. The exact numbers vary, but the passenger capacity of a car train is usually something like 1/2 of a normal night train or 1/3 of a normal day train, assuming that the train is fully dedicated to carrying people with cars. You also need special facilities and longer stops, because cars can't just dismount at nor…
>> You also need special facilities and longer stops, because cars can't just dismount at normal platforms in a couple of minutes.
So what? Point-to-point with no stops in between. Works for the chunnel, too.
Re: Austria rail operator OeBB unveils new night trains
#266Earlier quoted context omitted.
Because it's unprofitable. We need to either accept that we need to subsidise these kind of services for climate protection or ban flights inside the European Union
Or, shocking, let people take a flight if they want. (I low-key hate flying btw and prefer trains for shorter distances)
Re: Austria rail operator OeBB unveils new night trains
#267Earlier quoted context omitted.
It's interesting to me how you lob the words 'luddite' and 'wishing misery' at the most basic suggestion of moderation of abstinence from trips to Spain (or equivalent). I shudder at what words you must surely reserve for those that systemically privatize food, water, and shelter - things we actually need to survive.
And yet the author failed to explain how self flagellation and abstinence from proscribed behaviour will change anything
Your point is moot anyway because I wasn't arguing GP's point, I was saying that your reaction is disproportionate to the measures suggested.